About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


B-413794.2 1 (2017-04-06)

handle is hein.gao/gaobaduqi0001 and id is 1 raw text is: GAOU.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 441 G St. N.W. Comptroller General Washington, DC 20548 of the United States ....................................................................................................................... DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE The decision issued on the date below was subject to Decision a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Matter of: Amoje Food System Ltd. File: B-413794.2 Date: April 6, 2017 Kenneth A. Martin, Esq., The Martin Law Firm, PLLC, for the protester. Katherine B. McCulloch, Esq., Defense Logistics Agency, for the agency. Peter D. Verchinski, Esq., and Amy B. Pereira, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Determination that offeror's proposal was no longer in the competitive range was proper where agency reasonably determined that the proposal was unacceptable for failing to provide evidence of sufficient financial resources to perform the contract. 2. Protest challenging agency's conduct of discussions is denied where the record provides no basis to conclude that discussions were not meaningful or were otherwise improper. DECISION Amoje Food System Ltd, of Seoul, Korea, protests the Defense Logistics Agency's (DLA) elimination of its proposal from the competitive range under request for proposals (RFP) No. SPE300-16-R-0001 for a food distributor in Korea. Amoje challenges the agency's determination that the firm failed to demonstrate sufficient resources to perform the contract. We deny the protest. BACKGROUND The RFP, issued on February 19, 2016, sought to establish an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity fixed-price contract for a food distributor to act as a prime vendor for the supply and delivery of food items, and related services, in the Republic of Korea for a period of 60 months. The RFP provided that the estimated dollar value of the contract